Skip to content

ci(actions-lock): lock the SLSA generator call - #98

Merged
hyperpolymath merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/actions-lock-repair
Oct 27, 2026
Merged

hyperpolymath merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/actions-lock-repair

Conversation

@hyperpolymath

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

release.yml calls slsa-framework/slsa-github-generator@f7dd8c54… as a job-level reusable, but actions.lock had neither an entry nor a record for it. GitHub refuses to start a workflow whose uses: set doesn't match its lock entries. No workflow file changes.

Changes

  • release.yml: add the missing entry slsa-framework/slsa-github-generator@f7dd8c54c2067bafc12ca7a55595d5ee9b75204a
  • New record for it: ref: 'v2.1.0', owner_id: 80431187, repo_id: 475074978. That is the tag git ls-remote shows peeling to f7dd8c54, and the IDs seven other estate lockfiles record for this action.

RSR Quality Checklist

Required

  • No banned language patterns
  • No secrets, credentials, or .env files included

Testing

  • standards' scripts/check-lock-sync.sh reports no mismatch except the hyperpolymath/standards reusable refs, which this PR leaves alone (see below).
  • Every lock entry has a dependency record.

Not fixed here

The standards reusables (hypatia-scan, secret-scanner) stay red. At the pins on main they fail with "invalid lockfile pin" from standards' own old lockfile. Re-pinning to a current standards commit makes them fail at startup with zero jobs instead; I tested that on hyperpolymath/presswerk#138. That has to be fixed in standards, so this PR doesn't touch those pins.


Generated by Claude Code

The lock had drifted from the workflow files. GitHub refuses to start a
workflow whose uses: set doesn't match its lock entries, and rejects a
lock entry that records its own SHA as ref.

- `release.yml`: add the missing entry `slsa-framework/slsa-github-generator@f7dd8c54c2067bafc12ca7a55595d5ee9b75204a`
- new record `slsa-framework/slsa-github-generator@f7dd8c54c2067bafc12ca7a55595d5ee9b75204a` (ref `v2.1.0`, commit `f7dd8c54c206…`)

Each new record's commit was checked against the upstream tag with git
ls-remote. No commit an existing entry pins was changed. Standards
reusable pins are left as they are.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0132Cdz3iwk2QGKv2sUhhsye
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 27, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Important

Review skipped

Review was skipped due to path filters

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters: 1
  • .github/workflows/actions.lock is excluded by !**/*.lock

CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including **/dist/** will override the default block on the dist directory, by removing the pattern from both the lists.

Run configuration
  • Source mode: Auto
  • Repository: Unavailable
  • Branch: Unavailable
  • File: No configuration file from this repository applied
  • Commit: Unavailable
  • Layers: Organization UI
  • Review profile: ASSERTIVE
  • Plan: Advanced
  • Run ID: c8d82529-8b52-41e3-9f5a-4e3cfad49255

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • No new commits to review - use @coderabbitai full review for a full pass
  • Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@linear-code
linear-code Bot marked this pull request as ready for review October 27, 2026 01:33
@sonarqubecloud

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

CI note: the red checks on this PR don't come from this change. The PR edits only .github/workflows/actions.lock.

  • Hypatia neurosymbolic scan: the scan reports 9 critical findings of the form "CI policy requires a retired descriptile path; align the check with .machine_readable/descriptiles/". The scanner added a new rule about where descriptile files live; these are repo-content findings and don't involve the lockfile. main's last run (2026-10-25) predates the rule change.
  • governance / secret-scanner / rust-ci (0 jobs): the standards reusable workflows have started zero jobs from every caller estate-wide since about 2026-10-25 19:30 UTC, including on other repos' main. This PR doesn't touch those workflows' lock entries.
  • workflow-linter.yml: 0 jobs on main as well.

No fix exists yet for any of these, so I haven't ported one.


Generated by Claude Code

@hyperpolymath
hyperpolymath merged commit 00141a8 into main Oct 27, 2026
23 of 24 checks passed
@hyperpolymath
hyperpolymath deleted the ci/actions-lock-repair branch October 27, 2026 02:01
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Add Carrot credits or activate Agent usage billing to use Autofix

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants